1. Defendant A and B jointly and severally agreed with the Plaintiff KRW 98,59,191 as well as 5% per annum from August 22, 2017 to April 5, 2018.

1. Basic facts - The Plaintiff entered into a contract for transfer security (hereinafter “instant contract”) with D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) as a person holding a claim for the purchase price of KRW 133,59,191 on February 23, 2017, such as D, D’s representative director A, and D’s development and operation division B, as indicated in the attached Form B.

After that, D repaid to the Plaintiff KRW 35 million as the price for the above goods.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1-1 (the same as Eul evidence 1)

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The gist of the assertion asserts that the Defendants jointly and severally guaranteed the purchase price of D in accordance with the instant contract, so the Defendants jointly and severally held that the unpaid purchase price of D and the delayed payment should be paid to the Plaintiff.

In this regard, Defendant A and B knew at the time of entering into the instant contract that they provided D’s movable property as a security for transfer, and asserted that the Defendants did not have any intent to jointly and severally guarantee D’s claim for the purchase price of goods, and Defendant C did not have entered into the instant contract.

B. The Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant A and B indicated the title of the instant contract as “transfer for security” under the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the purport of the entire pleadings, i.e., the Plaintiff’s entire purport of the pleading. However, Article 1 of the instant contract stipulates that the Defendants jointly and severally bear the obligation to pay for the goods D, and specific provisions regarding the following due date, etc.; and furthermore, the offering of the goods as transfer for security is deemed as the goods owned by the Defendants and are not the goods owned by the said Defendants, it is reasonable to deem the instant contract as a transfer for security, and the said Defendants concluded a separate joint and several guarantee contract

Therefore, Defendant A and B jointly and severally paid to the Plaintiff KRW 98,59,191 (i.e., KRW 133,599,191-35,000) and a copy of the complaint of this case.